'LDP opposed Iraq war as it lacked legitimacy'

Lord McNally, is the leader of the Liberal Democrat Party, the third largest British political party in the House of Lords. Despite being the youngest of the three, the Liberal Democrat Party's popularity has steadily risen as is evident from the fact that it won 63 seats in Parliament in the last general elections.

Published: Wed 22 Feb 2006, 10:04 AM

Last updated: Sat 4 Apr 2015, 6:51 PM

Another 70 Liberal Democrat lords sit in the Upper House, in addition to 12 Euro MPs. The party strongly opposed the war on Iraq which made it popular with the anti-war campaigners.

Lord McNally will be addressing Khaleej Times International Forum on February 25, 2006 along with two other British Parliamentarians. Here he speaks exclusively to Khaleej Times.

Javed Malik (JM): What were your reasons for opposing the war on Iraq?

Lord McNally (LM): We opposed the war in Iraq because we were not convinced that the attempts to verify the claims of weapons of mass destruction had been exhausted. Nor were we convinced that the action had legal or international legitimacy. We felt that the action would weaken the United Nations and we were not convinced that the USA had a clear post-war strategy. At the General Election of 2005 domestic issues were at the forefront of voters' minds. Nevertheless Labour did pay a price for the Iraq war and the Liberal Democrats won more seats in Parliament than any third party in eighty years.

JM: From an international view point, Britain has a vital role to play on the world stage. Many Britons want to see Britain as a promoter of peace. But Britain still went to war. When you look back, how do you see the situation in Iraq today without Saddam Hussain?

LM: The present international situation is very dangerous. I believe that Britain should work with "old Europe" to promote dialogue and encourage negotiations for a host of problems across the Middle East. In Iraq we have to create circumstances where occupying forces can be withdrawn, full Iraqi sovereignty restored and reconstruction undertaken with international help and guarantees. In Palestine a two state solution remains the most realistic way forward. Both Hamas and whatever new Israeli government emerges will have to face some tough decisions. But if they are willing to make those decisions then there has to be a united international effort to support any peace process. Again I believe Britain working with its European partners could be supportive rather than relying on the USA to do everything itself. Relations with Iran could likewise benefit from a little burden sharing between Europe and the USA. It is never of any use saying we would not have started from here; but it happens to be true that had the authority of the UN has been respected, the major effort of the international community been devoted to ensuring a success of post Taleban Afghanistan, real muscle put behind the Palestine-Israeli road map and the Iraq adventure not undertaken, then both the regional and global security situation would have been much better. The war on terrorism could have been fought from a more secure ground and those who seek conflict between Muslim and Western cultures would not so easily mislead young people into terrorism.

JM: Britain and Muslim countries have always shared strong relations. How do you think these relations can be improved upon and bridges of understanding built — specially in the wake of the blasphemous cartoons in Denmark?

LM: We all have a responsibility to condemn violence and injustice from whatever source. I can understand Muslims taking offence at the Danish cartoons. But I cannot condone violence. We must all beware those who wish to use such issues to inflame hatred for political ends. We all now live in a global village where a lie can travel round the world before truth has put its boots on. I am very proud of Britain. I read recently that London is now the most multi-cultural city on earth with over 160 nationalities living there. Of course we have our racists and our xenophobes; but we have a history of tolerance and freedom which has meant welcoming immigrants and asylum seekers for hundreds of years. Our political system may not be perfect; but it is a robust Parliamentary democracy with a genuinely free Press. Britain may no longer be a world super power; but we have a wealth of experience which could enable us to play a crucial role in promoting a genuine dialogue between the cultures.

JM: Your party has been under the spotlight, with some of your potential leaders facing embarrassing personal revelations. Has this dented the image of the party?

LM: In ten days time the Liberal Democrats will have a new leader. We have recently gone through a period when we seemed determined to test the idea that all publicity is good publicity. But I have worked in and around Parliament now for forty years and I have seen that all the parties have their scandals. Despite that, we recently won a spectacular by-election. We are the largest Liberal Party in the European Parliament. We control major British cities such as Liverpool and Newcastle and share power with Labour in Scotland. We are the strong and distinctive voice in British politics between Labour's nanny state and post-Thatcher-conservatism. As such, I really do believe that for the Liberal Democrats the best is yet to be.

JM: You will be one of our guest speakers at the KT Forum. Are you looking forward to visiting Dubai, and the UAE?

LM: I am very much looking forward to my visit to the UAE. Hardly a day goes by in Britain without an article or television programme about the immense energy and vision shown by the UAE and Dubai in its development. If the dialogue between cultures is necessary, and I believe it is, the UAE could have an important part to play in demonstrating that we all have much to gain from harmony and mutual respect and much to lose by discord.